美國評論外交的權威性雜誌《外交政策》(Foreign Policy)網站七月二十三日登載投資管理協會研究主管維塔利‧格茲尼爾森(Vitaliy N.KATSENELSON)所撰「非吾等認知的中國泡沫即將來臨」(The China Bubble's Coming--But Not the One You Think)一文，提醒讀者相較於中國股市的變化，中國經濟近期的發展趨勢及其可能帶來的泡沬危機才是應該關注的焦點。
格茲尼爾森在文章中對於部份分析人員以中共最近公布今年前二季經濟成長數字接近百分之八，推論中國經濟似乎擺脫全球經濟風暴影響的說法，提出質疑。 針對目前中國的經濟，作者以十年前朗訊科技公司（Lucent Technologies）為創造營業成長的數字，採取借貸資金購買自家裝備的作法，指出美國目前即是採用類似的作法，用中共的資金購買中國產品。
不過，這樣的作法，雖然可以呈現短暫榮景的狀況，但時間一長，就會顯出疲態。十年前的朗訊科技公司即在不久後出現資金不足無力償還貸款的窘境。美國 雖然不是一般的私人企業，但其作法顯示中共的經濟成長顯然大部份是來自自家的資金，最後終將無法逃避朗訊科技公司陷入營業困境的惡運。
這樣的作法，必須仰賴美國消費市場恢復動能，才能真正的使經濟復甦，然而全球各地特別是美國的消費市場仍在持續下降中，對於急於追求創造經濟成長數字的中共，緩不濟急。
在這樣的情境下，中共若要維持經濟成長的帳面數字，可以利用其特殊的共產政權控制銀行的優勢，強迫銀行提供貸款資金創造投資假象，這是一般民主國家無法比照採用的方式，他們無法強迫銀行國有化，也不能強迫企業和消費者支出。
另外，中國共產黨政權擁有龐大資金以及支出機器，要創造貨幣供應量不是問題，因此在今年六月，中共的貨幣供應量成長百分之二十八點五，這樣的數字實則拜中共可以控制及強迫銀行提供貸款之賜。
此外，作者指出，中共雖然有龐大的外匯存底，但由於有嚴格的外匯管制，實際上並無法因此提高消費者的購買力。因此，持有龐大外匯的中共，可以很簡單 的要求公營法人機構借錢並迅速支出，隨意的建造公路、醫院、學校等基礎建設，甚至是某位高階黨員的房子。所以，中共要創造強勁的經濟成長數字，是不費吹灰 之力的。
依據格茲尼爾森在文中的分析，中共急於創造經濟成長數字的真正原因是因為中共沒有完善的社會安全網制度，它必須不惜任何代價維持經濟成長的榮景，否 則數百萬遷移到城市的人口，將因為失業、飢餓等生活不保的問題而引發社會暴動，進而危及中共政權。不過，中共人為的刺激經濟成長，希望拖延時間直至全球經 濟穩定為止的作法，是否可逃避大量可怕的借貸可能帶來的泡沬危機，則是未知數，這猶如一顆隨時可能爆炸的未爆彈。
作者特別提醒快速成長不等同於可持續增長。在過去十年中，中國的經濟成長絕大部份來自對美國的借貸。這樣的成長會帶來大量的壞帳，中共終將付出代價，只不過是時間以及影響層面大小的問題而已。
另外，作者說，中共還有一個困境。中國出口貨品到美國，賺取美元，但為了避免美元貶值（人民幣升值），從而引起降低中國貨品在美國市場的競爭力，中共並未將出口賺取的美元按一般作法換成人民幣，而是用來購買美國債券。
作者說，已持有二點二兆美元美國債券的中共面臨一項難題。為了刺激經濟成長，中共在中國境內需要資金，但如果出售美國債券，將會刺激人民幣升值、不利中國產品的出口、以及美國利率上升等不利因素。
作者認為中共若無法處理這些難題，終將走入泡沫，只不過是時間早晚的問題。不過可以肯定的是，中共若不及早修正其藐視金融法則的作法，將使其經濟陷入更難以復甦的境地。
美國智庫傳統基金會（Heritage Foundation）在本月十七日登載亞洲經濟政策研究員德里克‧西瑟斯(Derek Scissors)撰寫一篇名為「中共拒絕調整經濟」的文章。文章指出雖然中國經濟情況多變且複雜，但是中共統計局為了製造符合中共意向的數字，只需要十 五天的時間，即可完成有著十三億人口的經濟動態調查報告。
在美國傳統基金會的報告中，西瑟斯稱中共目前實施的部份經濟刺激方式，大多是依賴加大投資力度在短期內改善中國經濟狀況，但是這樣的作法，會導致中共落入大量的財政赤字，並使中國經濟再次回到引發此次經濟危機的舊經濟軌道上。
西瑟斯指出，中共因應這次經濟危機的作法只是強化危機發生前的政策，人為的強迫銀行借貸以及提高貨幣供應量，創造不可持續的經濟成長短暫榮景，但這無法幫助解決全球經濟風暴的問題，反而推遲了採取調整及改革等根本解決問題的方法，如此將拖累中國及全球的經濟。
(http://www.dajiyuan.com)
The China Bubble's Coming -- But Not the One You Think
Financial commentators are obsessively debating whether the recent rise in the Chinese stock market means there's a bubble -- and if so, when it's going to burst.
My take? Who cares! What happens to the broader Chinese economy is what we should really be watching. It will have a far-reaching impact on the rest of the world -- much more far-reaching than a decline in stocks.
Despite everything, the Chinese economy has shown incredible resilience recently. Although its biggest customers -- the United States and Europe -- are struggling (to say the least) and its exports are down more than 20 percent, China is still spitting out economic growth numbers as if there weren't a worry in the world. The most recent estimate put annual growth at nearly 8 percent.
Is the Chinese economy operating in a different economic reality? Will it continue to grow, no matter what the global economy is doing?
The answer to both questions is no. China's fortunes over the past decade are reminiscent of Lucent Technologies in the 1990s. Lucent sold computer equipment to dot-coms. At first, its growth was natural, the result of selling goods to traditional, cash-generating companies. After opportunities with cash-generating customers dried out, it moved to start-ups -- and its growth became slightly artificial. These dot-coms were able to buy Lucent's equipment only by raising money through private equity and equity markets, since their business models didn't factor in the necessity of cash-flow generation.
Funds to buy Lucent's equipment quickly dried up, and its growth should have decelerated or declined. Instead, Lucent offered its own financing to dot-coms by borrowing and lending money on the cheap to finance the purchase of its own equipment. This worked well enough, until it came time to pay back the loans.
The United States, of course, isn't a dot-com. But a great portion of its growth came from borrowing Chinese money to buy Chinese goods, which means that Chinese growth was dependent on that very same borrowing.
Now the United States and the rest of the world is retrenching, corporations are slashing their spending, and consumers are closing their pocket books. This means that the consumption of Chinese goods is on the decline. And this is where the dot-com analogy breaks down. Unlike Lucent, China has nuclear weapons. It can print money at will and can simply order its banks to lend. It is a communist command economy, after all. Lucent is now a $2 stock. China won't go down that easily.
The Chinese central bank has a significant advantage over the U.S. Federal Reserve. Chairman Ben Bernanke and his cohort may print a lot of money (and they did), but there's almost nothing they can do to speed the velocity of money. They simply cannot force banks to lend without nationalizing them (and only the government-sponsored enterprises have been nationalized). They also cannot force corporations and consumers to spend. Since China isn't a democracy, it doesn't suffer these problems.
China's communist government owns a large part of the money-creation and money-spending apparatus. Money supply therefore shot up 28.5 percent in June. Since it controls the banks, it can force them to lend, which it has also done.
Finally, China can force government-owned corporate entities to borrow and spend, and spend quickly itself. This isn't some slow-moving, touchy-feely democracy. If the Chinese government decides to build a highway, it simply draws a straight line on the map. Any obstacle -- like a hospital, a school, or a Politburo member's house -- can become a casualty of the greater good. (Okay -- maybe not the Politburo member's house).
Although China can't control consumer spending, the consumer is a comparatively small part of its economy. Plus, currency control diminishes the consumer's buying power. All of this makes the United States' TARP plans look like child's play. If China wants to stimulate the economy, it does so -- and fast. That's why the country is producing such robust economic numbers.
Why is China doing this? It doesn't have the kind of social safety net one sees in the developed world, so it needs to keep its economy going at any cost. Millions of people have migrated to its cities, and now they're hungry and unemployed. People without food or work tend to riot. To keep that from happening, the government is more than willing to artificially stimulate the economy, in the hopes of buying time until the global system stabilizes. It's literally forcing banks to lend -- which will create a huge pile of horrible loans on top of the ones they've originated over the last decade.
But don't confuse fast growth with sustainable growth. Much of China's growth over the past decade has come from lending to the United States. The country suffers from real overcapacity. And now growth comes from borrowing -- and hundreds of billion-dollar decisions made on the fly don't inspire a lot of confidence. For example, a nearly completed, 13-story building in Shanghai collapsed in June due to the poor quality of its construction.
This growth will result in a huge pile of bad debt -- as forced lending is bad lending. The list of negative consequences is very long, but the bottom line is simple: There is no miracle in the Chinese miracle growth, and China will pay a price. The only question is when and how much.
Another casualty of what's taking place in China is the U.S. interest rate. China sold goods to the United States and received dollars in exchange. If China were to follow the natural order of things, it would have converted those dollars to renminbi (that is, sell dollars and buy renminbi). The dollar would have declined and renminbi would have risen. But this would have made Chinese goods more expensive in dollars -- making Chinese products less price-competitive. China would have exported less, and its economy would have grown at a much slower rate.
But China chose a different route. Instead of exchanging dollars back into renminbi and thus driving the dollar down and the renminbi up -- the natural order of things -- China parked its money in the dollar by buying Treasurys. It artificially propped up the dollar. And now, China is sitting on 2.2 trillion of them.
Now, China needs to stimulate its economy. It's facing a very delicate situation indeed: It needs the money internally to finance its continued growth. However, if it were to sell dollar-denominated treasuries, several bad things would happen. Its currency would skyrocket -- meaning the loss of its competitive low-cost-producer edge. Or, U.S. interest rates would go up dramatically -- not good for its biggest customer, and therefore not good for China.
This is why China is desperately trying to figure out how to withdraw its funds from the dollar without driving it down -- not an easy feat.
And the U.S. government isn't helping: It's printing money and issuing Treasurys at a fast clip, and needs somebody to keep buying them. If China reduces or halts its buying, the United States may be looking at high interest rates, with or without inflation. (The latter scenario is most worrying.)
All in all, this spells trouble -- a big, big Chinese bubble. Identifying such bubbles is a lot easier than timing their collapse. But as we've recently learned, you can defy the laws of financial gravity for only so long. Put simply, mean reversion is a bitch. And the longer excesses persist, the harder the financial gravity will bring China's economy back to Earth.
沒有留言:
張貼留言